Murders up 11% under 0bama

[wvit1001]

gun regulations don't give anyone unlimited search and seizure powers.

[wvit1001]

they are the source sweaty?  they manufacture and distribute the guns?

[D2D]

 

gun regulations don't give anyone unlimited search and seizure powers.

Liar!

[Local5th]

I'm not the one promoting unwarranted stops and searches

If you support TSA searches you damn well do wvit.

[wvit1001]

you agreed to that search when you bought the airline ticket local.

[Local5th]

No contract for an illegal action is legal or binding wvit.

If it did we could just say you agree to a search when you venture into public areas.

[wvit1001]

it's not an illegal action local.  The courts have ruled on that.

[wvit1001]

In 1973 the 9th Circuit Court rules on U.S. vs Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908, there are key pieces of wording that give the TSA its power to search essentially any way they choose to. The key wording in this ruling includes “noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.”

U.S. vs Davis goes onto to state �

[Local5th]

I didn't think stop and frisk was illegal.

You can't enter inter-city schools without going through a scanner and being frisked if you don't pass.

[wvit1001]

These 9th Circuit Court ruling laid the path for the creation of Public Law 107-71, the Aviation Transportation and Security Act, which was virtually unopposed by legislators when it was it was signed into law on the 19th of November 2001 by President George W. Bush. This law laid the groundwork for the Transportation Security Administration and the evolution of its current security procedures.

These laws give the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration significant legal latitude to perform the searches utilizing their current procedures without fear of violating the Fourth Amendment.

[wvit1001]

The Fourth Amendment provides "the right of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search and seizures…."

Prior to 1985, lower courts were divided on the issue of student privacy rights in schools.   It was not until the ruling
in New Jersey v. T.L.O. did the U.S. Supreme Court for the first time definitively announce the rule governing the Fourth Amendment in schools and the standard for searches.

The Court in determining the standard of reasonableness of searches requires balancing the need to maintain security and order in the schools against the student’s privacy interests.


http://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/centers/childlaw/childed/pdfs/2011studentpapers/coker_fourth_amendment.pdf

[sweetwater5s9]

The Supreme Court defined a frisk as a carefully limited search for weapons, limited to someone's outer clothing. To justify a frisk, an officer needs reasonable belief that the stopped person may be armed and dangerous.

Reasonable suspicion can be based on:

    Facts seen and interpreted by police, light of training and experience
    Informants' tips
    A profile, such as a drug courier or gang member profiles
    Information shared by police departments
    Presence in a high crime neighborhood
    Unprovoked flight after seeing police
    Information gathered during a voluntary encounter

For a frisk, reasonable suspicion must justify the stop, and that the suspect is armed and dangerous. The government must show two reasonable suspicion types for a frisk:

    A reasonable suspicion criminal activity may be afoot before the stop
    A reasonable suspicion someone may be armed and dangerous, before the frisk

http://criminal.lawyers.com/criminal-law-basics/your-search-and-seizure-rights-stop-and-frisk.html


I thought you wanted to stop illegal guns and criminals who violate gun laws while protecting the innocent, wvit?   Why have you changed your mind?